On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> This presumably merged the new head [in petsc-release/buildsystem] > that I created with the new head that Barry created in his clone? > > BTW: am I correct in assuming that this head won't get pushed to > buildsystem unless 'petsc-release -> petsc-dev -> push to bitbucket' > process is completed? So in that intermediate time - petsc-release > will point to a non-existant buildsystem state? > > Or will a push of petsc-release won't succeed until the above > 'petsc-release -> petsc-dev -> push to bitbucket' process is > completed? > I think it won't succeed, but would have to check. > > > [error with buildsystem push - so merge with petsc-release, push] > > > > > > > Right, go to petsc-dev, pull petsc-release, merge (applies to both > > petsc-dev and petsc-dev/buildsystem), and push. > > > > > > > > > > BTW: from http://mercurial.selenic.com/wiki/Subrepository > > > > > > * There's no support for merging across renaming/moving subrepos * > > > > > > So changing 'BuildSystem -> 'buildsystem' will cause grief with > subrepos? > > > > > > > I think we should do the rename first. > > Then we should perhaps wait till the next release [just before the > release - when no more patches will be merged from petsc-3.3 to > petsc-dev] before making these changes? > > [I don't think its appropriate to make this change for a petsc-3.3 patch > update.] > Okay, what if we start using subrepos with petsc-dev -> buildsystem and let petsc-release continue to depend on a buildsystem-release without use of subrepo? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20121117/351dd19f/attachment-0001.html>
